Antifa IS just as worse as neo Nazis. Both groups commit the same crimes. German Nazis committed atrocities to the human race that some people to this day remember with horrible detail. Yes Nazis committed genocide however, you failed to state an obvious difference between neo Nazis and Nazis. You just clumped both groups together.

I am not defending neo Nazis. Not once have I defended neo Nazis. So stop making crap up to justify your huge mistake. Please stop insulting people by falsely comparing neo Nazis to German nazis. It's an insult to survivors and their families. Which by the way I have a few family members and patients who survived the war. And all have mentioned how neo Nazis are nothing compared to German Nazis. So no it is not insane to say antifa is just as worse as neo nazis. Why don't you brush up on your history first before you make insulting comments.

I came to that conclusion because of what you said. You were pretty clear in comparing neo nazis to nazis. And i agree with whiteorchid. Antifa, a domestic terrrorsit group is just as bad as neo nazis. Both groups destroy, riot, and physically attack people. But I wouldnt go as far as saying they commit genocide. That would be an insult to those who actually died and survived through a genocide. There is a distincion between neo nazis and nazis. why don't you just stick to the facts instead of insulting millions of people and spreading your paranoia when you don't even understand how disrespectful you are.

Again, it is obvious you have no clue how horrible WW2 was for people. why don't you ask a WW2 survivor how it feels to have their experiences being compared to antifa and neo nazis, yes they are alike. compared to german nazis, they are just violent children throwing temper tantrums. that is the exact words my grandmother used who by the way lived through it. why don't you open a book and maybe you will understand how wrong you are.

you say neo nazis end goal is just like german nazis. yes that is wrong and America should watch out for that. however, neo nazis are nowhere near commiting the same crimes. you can't punish a person or a group of people for a crime they haven't commited yet. it's like beating a person with a bat, which what antifa does, for thinking about a crime. you can't justify that no matter how horrible these people are. if you do that then you are no better than the people you accuse of hate.

And who the heck is "coming to the defense of neo nazis"? i don't see anyone defending neo nazis. they are just as bad as antifa. Instead of selectively reading and picking out what you want to read while ignoring everything else, why don't you try to comprehend what is actually being said.

Antifa is not a violent protest group, they're domestic terrorists.

Why are you confusing neo nazis to german nazis? Or are you saying neo nazis are committing the same crimes as German nazis?

How dare you compare the pain and suffering my family went through to the actions of hate groups? You are insulting their memory by comparing their experiences to the actions of low life hate groups which is nothing compared to what they went through during WW2. Just in case you don't know, which you obviously don't, during WW2 people were forced in concentration camps, were either tortured to death or starved and then tortured to death. People helplessly stood by while they watched their families die. Others became human experiments then died. so if neo nazis are comparable to german nazis then where are the concentration camps? where are the dead bodies of tortured people?

Before you insult people with something you obviously have no clue, take a history refresher course and learn what people had to endure during the war. and stop insulting their memory.

You do realize that the neo-nazis protesting now are not the same German nazis during WW2? When did these American neo-nazis commit genocide? I'm not defending neo-nazis. What they stand for is disgusting and inexcusable. But I'm not going to insult and diminish the atrocities suffered by those who died in WW2. It's one thing to hate and disagree with a group for their ideology but it's another to compare them to another group that actually committed genocide.

Comparing current hate groups to German Nazis from WW2 is an insult to the victims who died or survived WW2. What is going on now is nowhere near what others have endured during the war.

And yes, WW2 survivors and veterans find it offensive. I have patients and family members who lived through it, still alive and remember every horrible detail.

Antifa is just as worse as Nazis. As pp said, they resort to rioting, violence, and destruction of public property. I don't care what you believe in or what you are against, your beliefs don't give you a free pass to be violent against others. If you're the type to justify this type of violence well then, says a lot about your character.

Antifa is a domestic terrorist group. They riot, destroy property which costs taxpayers, and violently attack people. What you're pretty much saying is violence is okay as long as it's against people you don't agree with. So when you get in an argument with someone you disagree with or even hate, do you just grab a bat and swing or throw toxic substances in their faces? coz that is what antifa have been doing.

just coz a person disagrees with someone, hate their beliefs or idealogies, it doesnt give them a right to physically assault anyone. There is no jusification for it.

so yes, violence came from both sides. Both sides are equally responsible. Both sides are equally vile, disgusting human beings.

The false equivalency that comes from saying "there was violence on both sides" really makes me see red. When one side is Nazis and the other side is anti Nazis, the anti Nazis are automatically better than the Nazis. This is like saying "the cancer was violent, but so was the chemotherapy!" It might be technically true, but they are worlds apart.

Anti fascists used to just be called Americans, you know.

any one involved in the violence that day should be fired, including the counter protesters and city officials who knew about the protest. it wasnt a secret that there would be violence. i dont think they would have known about the driver killing and injuring people but there is no excuse for allowing this event when white supremacist and antifa were seen opposite each other. it doesnt take a genius to know people would get hurt when both sides come armed and ready for a fight. both sides, and city officials are to blame for what happened.

Any members of any group, protester and counter protester that incited violence. The violence came from both sides.

What other hate group was there?

I see. I can see where employers would fire certain individuals for participating in protests. But only if these people stupidly represented their work. Like wearing the company logo. Or if there was proof of their involvement in the violence. The way I see it, no matter which hate group you participated in that day, if you were a part of the violence then you deserve to lose your job.

The way i see it, the employers have to fire them to protect their other employees or customers. These people can't peacefully work around black individuals when they hate them so much. And black employees shouldn't be subjected to a work environment with white supremacists who hate them.

@white There wasn't much of an article with it, only a short blurb which is why I didn't post the link, but it didn't say specifically they were involved with the violence, just that they were there taking part in the rally.

So I'm not understanding this. Haven't really seen this particular thread anywhere. Is it saying that those identified in the picture are being fired at their job? If so were any of those identified involved in the violence? Or were they peacefully protesting?

I believe it was you who initially @ me and called me out ? but ok.

Again, you have the right to think I'm ridiculous and insult my intelligence. I'll find a way to go on ?

You put yourself out there you get results. Simply why im not on facebook. No one should be fired for being gay. But you put your stuff out there your going to be judged on it, whether its right or not.

Olivia you make good points. I see what you're saying and can get on board with that.

I will say that I wasn't offended but I didn't understand the point of needing to play devil's advocate for a group of people whose actions don't deserve us trying to understand or sympathize with. The initial situation we were presented with was about these nazis, clansmen and white supremacists losing their jobs for their involvement in the rally that took place this past weekend. THAT was the situation, trying to make it about anything else was kind of irrelevant because it isn't comparable. They aren't LGBT supporters, if they were this would be a completely different convo. They are racists. They aren't a protected group. They is no injustice in their terminations as it's completely justified legally and, as most of us would agree, morally.

Filterless I never did any of those things. I used them as analogies. Analogies are not direct comparisons. ? there's no need to insult my intelligence. I don't do that to you, even though some of the things you say don't make sense to me. Why do you feel the need to stoop to insults?

Okay filter ?

We can agree to disagree then. That's fine. I respect your right to have your own opinions.

Not sure how I am being offensive. Could you be more specific? Because it wasn't my intention to offend anyone.

Ah meant "who's"

Playing devils advocate for racist hateful people does raise some eyebrows. Have you thought about the reasons your comments are taken in a offensive way by multiple users? It's not me it's you girl, you offended people on my makeup post and you're being offensive now. Your reasoning is flawed to say the least

I don't think there is a slippery slope here. Just like there's no "slippery slope" from gay marriage to bestiality and pedohilia (hello, straw men!), there is no slope to fear in shutting down hatred and I think the line is pretty clear.

I am against abortion (not hate speech) vs anyone who has had an abortion deserves to die (hate speech).

I'm proud of my heritage (not hate speech) vs Every other race is inherently inferior to mine (hate speech).

I think we have a difference of opinion on 'Intellectual diversity' ?‍♀️

There's literally no slippery slope here. It's literally black and white. Not even a hint of grey.

Here's the thing, you are free to say whatever you want. You are, however, not free from the consequences of what you say. Everything you say/do has consequences.

Those people cannot be prosecuted for what they SAID, per the 1st amendment. They can be fired from their jobs though. IF the employer needed a specific reason, they could easily say one of these neo-nazis created a hostile work environment. If you are not white and one of these people is your coworker, would you really feel safe working with them? I wouldn't.

I do see what you're saying JL. I don't necessarily agree that opinions should in any way be grounds for termination of employment but I think in this case there are extenuating circumstances that allow for it.

Anything can be twisted into a justification if an employer really wants to get rid of an employee as it is.

What you all must understand is that these employers aren't violating anyone's rights in terminating them. We are protected from being fired or discriminated against in the workplace for things that we cannot control such as race, religion, sexual orientation. Employers have the right to terminate anyone's employment at any time for any reason in the commonwealth that this took place. These employers have just as must right to fire these people as these supremacists did to assemble in the first place. If you support legal rights, don't pick and choose which ones you support.

As adults we need to understand that our actions have consequences. Things we do in public (including the internet) can get us fired!That's life. I do not feel bad for anyone whose packing up their office right now.

Unemployment isn't funded by taxes- unemployment is funded by unemployment insurance $.

Your freedom of speech ends when you take actions that interfere with other people's rights. Pitchforks and torches aren't covered under protected words.

Now if you want to talk about rights being stripped away do some research on the Black Panther Party. See how the FBI harassed, in-prisoned, and murdered the whole party. A party that was not built on hate but on equality, the president was so scared of the words of Fred Hamond they literally blew his brains out while he was sleeping next to his pregnant wife and laughed about it. Let's address the actual injustices in the country before we get all up and arms about things that are perfectly fair ??

I don't agree with JL.

You have the right to hate whomever you want, by all means but if your views are a conflict of interest with your employers', be prepared to face any consequences.

I would expect the same for those protesting against gay rights (in reference to the scenario of gay rights). ?

Silly silly I NEVER said that.

As an employer myself, I can totally understand what people are saying about employers having the right to fire someone like that. I certainly wouldn't want to be forced to keep someone like that on my staff so I totally get that. And I also understand that freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences. I realize now that a couple things I mentioned may make it seem like I think they shouldn't be fired. Which is not the case. If all those nazis get fired, I definitely wouldn't lose any sleep over it lol

I was simply posing some questions for thought in order to relay the point I was making in my very first comment. I was just mentioning the slippery slope and how it could be interpreted differently depending on which side you're on.

I think a couple people, like filter, read my questions and take it personally or think that's how I feel. I explicitly said I was playing devils advocate and was just posing the questions as food for thought. I like to debate and have discussions, even when the subject is something I disagree with. I like to separate myself from the emotional aspect of a subject and look at things objectively. I think intellectual diversity is just as important as racial or other diversity. ??‍♀️

So you think employers should keep racist, violence inciting bigots on their payroll? What? How does that even make sense?

Sure people have a right to opinions and freedom of speech. That doesn't mean there won't be personal repercussions.

The fact that people are even having this conversation is a clear sign of white privilege and it's disgusting.

@JL09 the point is obviously going over your head. Losing your job and losing your rights are two totally different thing. For example if one of these men works at Target, and Target fires them, Target has not taken away their right to be a Natzi, they can still be hateful beasts they just need to find an employer who supports it. It's is a public safety issue to have someone who openly hates others working in any aspect of service, these men could be doctors, chefs, police officers, politicians, you name it. Being gay is not comparable in any way, shape, or form. Being gay defines who you love, not who you hate, yes it is accepted to love anyone you want and I'm sorry the stigma carried by openly hating others somehow infringes upon your rights. This coupled with some of your past comments seriously makes me question your personal beliefs ?

Freedom of speech means that the government can not fine, imprison or otherwise punish you for your thoughts, words (hate speech is not covered under the 1st amendment), etc.

It does NOT mean that you get to be a torch wielding nazi and face no repercussions. It does not mean that your fellow citizens can't call you out in your hate and bigotry. It doesn't mean that anyone has to listen to what you say. It doesn't mean that your employer can't fire you for being a nazi.

We had a war about this. The whole world was involved.

I have to agree with JL.. we can't start punishing people for their thoughts no matter how disgusting they are.

However, once those cross into violence and threats that changes. Stating "I hate (insert any culture/race/religion/etc)" is one thing but when you start threatening to hurt people that's different all together.

At the same time, I don't know if any company would want to be represented by someone who used their freedom of speech to spew out hate.

It's a very slippery slope.

@imsorry thanks for the observation ?

Have a nice day

They have the right to spew hateful BS.

Their employers have the right to not tolerate their hateful BS.

I would not want to employee anyone who openly hates any group based on their color, ethnicity, etc. YOU'RE FIRED is very appropriate IMO.

JL- you might be delusional

KKK has been active in our area forever, the birthplace. The kind of people that want to carry around torches and yell supremacist slurs are not the people you want to hire.

Aka

They are not very good people no matter what their mamas tell you.

JL09- Nazis aren't a protected group, LGBT are a protected group.

Losing your job is very different from losing your rights.

I'd be horrified if these protesters were denied rights. They weren't.

I'm proud that employers - who have the right to fire employees at will - are letting go of employees who were acting shamefully.

Freedom of speech, not freedom from consequence. ?

Since the rise of social media people have been fired for inappropriate behaviors or actions. Remember the public relations lady who tweeted horrible things about Africa, turned her phone off for a flight and by the time her flight was over she was fired? People's words and actions have consequences. Especially in the business place. While everyone has a right to free speech, free speech does not guarantee that your job will remain there after your free speech is finished.

While many work places have statements protecting workers rights from being fired or discriminated against in hiring for being gay, age, race, ethnicity, the protection doesn't include free speech.

Here's the statement- "provides equal employment opportunities (EEO) to all employees and applicants for employment without regard to race, color, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, marital status or status as a covered veteran in accordance with applicable state and local laws governing nondiscrimination in employment."

Just because I'm protected in applying and remaining in a job because of the above doesn't mean I can spout off anything I want online or at a protest. (Or in my case- I can't just run my mouth in my college classroom). There are consequences for your actions and words. We've had to call in adjunct professors for this. (Some are not being rehired after posting what they wanted on social media).

Now that my kids are awake I'll leave you all with this:

For every Nazi fired, that's another Nazi able to collect unemployment

Which our tax dollars go toward. ?

So there's that...?

Smay I'm sorry if that bothered you. That wasn't my intention. I wasn't really comparing the two. I was simply playing devils advocate and using another example of a situation where a boss would disagree with one of their employees' and punish them for it. And this happens often. I had a friend who was fired from a small business two days after he made an announcement coming out on Facebook. So that's why that example came to my mind.

You being upset with that would imply that you would find that scenario a grave injustice, as would I. Which is why I find it difficult to be happy and celebrate the protestors getting fired. Again, where do you draw that line? That's all I was asking.

Wow I can't believe you would compare being gay with being a Nazi. And Bernie has nothing to do with this.

Only 7am and I've had enough internet today. Have a great day ladies.

Osie I do kind of see your point, but to play devils advocate:

A person comes out as gay and announces it to the people he or she knows. It gets around to their boss and the boss decides those "views/morals" don't mesh well with the business's. He gets fired. Boss tells him to "keep that personal crap at home."

Would this be acceptable? I doubt Bernie (or whoever runs this Facebook account) would applaud that. I understand freedom of speech can be met with consequences, but who is to decide when it's injustice and when it's not?

Just food for thought ?

If ppl thought a nazi worked at my bosses small business, we would be ruined in the community. Keep your personal crap at home and off the internet. Freedom of speech doesnt mean your able to say and do what you want and keep your job.

A business can say that this individual's views and beliefs don't mesh with the core values and beliefs. People have been fired for less.

@chavez that's good to know! I would hope he didn't actually think that way. If I were him I'd be upset that a group was using my pic ?

And if he doesn't think this way, he may want to start separating himself from the socialist party. I don't foresee a bright political future for him otherwise.

FYI- that's NOT bernie sanders sharing this. It's a page that simply uses his photo for their cover picture.

I agree with pp. i'm a strong believer that if I want someone to respect my beliefs, I have to respect their right to have their own beliefs. Its scary to believe some people actually think like this, but on the other hand they probably think the same about us

Eta: i'm also talking about those who didn't not use physical violence

Does Bernie actually run that page or is that just his picture because I could have sworn he had his own name on his official Facebook?

Racism is a crime. Free speech is great but it does not allow freedom from repercussion.

Thefourofus I totally know how you feel. Trust me I DO NOT want to even remotely sound like I'm defending their actions. And I'm not. I think the kkk and those who were there are sick people. And I fully believe they will get God's judgment, if not in this life then at the end.

But I'm actually defending my own freedoms by stating what I have. It terrifies me that someone like Bernie, who has a wide platform and could have possibly been our president, is A-okay with punishing people for their opinions. Again, I'm talking about the ones who protested, not the ones who committed crimes via assault or vandalism. I see something like this and I see a possible future where we aren't allowed to express our opinions. Where the government can do what it wants and we no longer have the right to peacefully speak out against it because it might offend somebody or because somebody might disagree with my opinion. It's a very scary thought.

I understand your point completely @JL, but I am the type of person that can often see both sides of an arguement. It indeed would be a slippery slope to start punishing people for their thoughts. But then the other part of me really wants to see these people treated like the terrorists that I also feel that they are. But I completely see the point you are making here. I guess tensions are just so hard right now because of all of this madness that it's hard to see anything from a different perspective because this was just so bad.

Assuming most of these people are from Virginia then they can be fired for anything at all, at any time. Virginia is an employment-at-will state. Those protestors were exercising their right to protest and their employers are exercising their right to terminate per their own discretion.

@jl I totally agree with u. What u wrote here is written so well I have nothing more to add.

Also, hate speech is not something that can be regulated. It is completely relative, because when it happens, one party views it as hate speech, while the other views it as simply speech.

If I were to say "Abortion is murder." One who is heavily prochoice COULD view that as hate speech. So should we start making opinions illegal? where do we draw that line?

On the other side. Things like violence and threats are objective. Beating someone with a tire iron, or threatening to do so, would mean the same to anyone. THAT is punishable by law.

Threats and hate speech are not the same thing pp. one is a statement. The other is a call to action.

It's why you can't yell "FIRE!" In a crowded theater. It's a call to action.

But saying something racist isn't a crime and is not punishable by law. Deplorable? Yes. Crime? No.

Hate speech (not a crime): You stupid [insert race] ignoramous!!

Hate crime (punishable): I'm going to beat you senseless you stupid [insert race]!" *as you raise tire iron*

See the difference? One is protected by freedom of speech. One is not.

Hate speech is 100% a crime. It's considered a hate crime which has strict laws. You can't walk around saying things like if your not white you deserve death, and not be expected to get in trouble. You can't threaten anybody and hide behind freedom of speech.

There is no right or wrong freedom of speech. Hate speech isn't a crime either. If that were the case then all the anti-Trump/Obama people spewing hate would've been prosecuted. Even though it is hate speech it is still protected under freedom of speech. Now hate crimes are illegal and so is assault. But if someone were to yell at me ' f*** you, you pasty white ass cracker' I couldn't charge them with a hate crime. Now if they were bludgeoning me with a tire iron while saying it, then they could be charged with assault and a hate crime.

Just for clarification I'm referring to the ones who were not committing crimes, such as assault or destroying property.

Hate speech, as ugly as it is, is not a crime.

I think it is absolutely fine. These people are terrorists. This wasn't a peaceful protest, and the majority were not using freedom of speech in the right way. What they were saying, chanting, and doing was a hate crime which is illegal. We have laws against actions like these for a reason. Now yes, a few people were being peaceful and not breaking the law but the vast majority were breaking the law and should be punished to the full extent of the law. Jl, I get what your saying but, marching against abortion and womens rights is different then chanting about how anybody that's not white should be killed, called awful names, and everything else they were protesting. Any of the women that were bring violent also deserve jail. But you can't hide a hate crime behind freedom of speech and expect no backlash. They deserve to get fired not for having opinions, but for breaking the law.

Also, to anyone who thinks this is good, id ask you to turn the tables.

Let me kick you a scenario: Would it be okay for someone who protested at the women's march in support of planned parenthood to get fired because their bosses are pro life? Wouldn't that be an injustice?

Again I stress: slippery slope. You can't give freedom of speech to some and not to others, simply because you disagree with them.

.........that's kind of what the Nazis did in Germany......

Good, they deserve it.

I agree with JL09. Basically they're being punished for freedom of speech. I don't agree with racism/white supremacy but they have the freedom to have their beliefs and protest. When you take away that constitutional right we might as well become a dictatorship. ??‍♀️

The ones who were there to protest and did not commit crimes should not be fired for their opinion, no matter how disgusting.

It's terrifying to think that someone could lose their livelihood because of their opinions. That's a very slippery slope and could turn very bad. I'm disgusted that Bernie likes this. But then again, that's what socialism is all about. We don't need thought police in this country.

I wonder if he felt the same way about the antifa people who were screaming "shoot the police! fry them like bacon!"

Or about madonna saying she's had dreams about blowing up the White House.

Or about Kathy griffin holding up a severed head.

If we start policing people's opinions, simply because we disagree with them, that's when we officially lose our freedom.

☕